PUREONE BETA RATES!

Status
Not open for further replies.
If the Engineer at Purolator is giving out measured beta ratio data, then I'd have to believe him. Unless someone want's to buy and send PureONE filters to an independent test lab to prove them right or wrong, then I'd have to believe their advertised efficiency numbers. I highly doubt they could get away (legally) by saying all over their website and filter boxes that their PureONE is 99.9% efficient at 20 microns without another filter company threatening a lawsuit if they found the claim to be false. You can bet other filter manufactures buy and dissect & test their competitions filters.

I don't see why it's so hard to not believe their 99.9% efficiency claim at 20 microns when there are so many other high end filters that have about the same claim.
 
Quote:
I don't see why it's so hard to not believe their 99.9% efficiency claim at 20 microns when there are so many other high end filters that have about the same claim.
\

Yet no one appears to even consider the oddity in the lack of such ability in a much cleaner environment with more expensive filters. Those who "want" to believe ..take it at face value and move forward in 100% confidence of it being valid. Others, like myself ..and really not caring one way or another, question how this is possible ..at a discount ..yet totally ignored by their affiliates and associates in other fluid sectors.

It's more a statement of what people "want" to see instead of the content itself. Some are critical of "wait a minute, this doesn't add up" ..and some aren't.

Tell me that this doesn't flag even ONE notation on anyone's radar?? Not even ONE??

Naturally we can all resort to "well, you don't like it ..YOU disprove it!" and go about acting like the invisible elephant just isn't there ..

..but so be it.

Again, PureOne filters are great. If I wasn't using EaO's for longer drains ...they would be my first choice.
 
K&N claims 98.9% at 20 microns. Not that far off from Purolators' numbers.

Guess Purolator must spend less money on advertising so they don't need to charge as much for their products to stay in business.
wink.gif


How many Purolator TV ads do you see? How many Purolator magazine ads do you see relative to the other big filter names? I can't even recall any TV ads.
21.gif
 
Amsoil does not make their own filters inthe past they have used Hasting and Baldwin as suppliers Baldwin owns Hastings by the way. I have no idea who they use today but their filters I am sure are built to their specifications and to their price point. If something is wrong with an Amsoil filter it is the fault of the manufacture not Amsoil!Even OEM's do not make their own filter's they are made for them by somone that makes filters for a living and they just put their name on the side.

I too hate MLM sales but Garry I s a good guy and very helpful. I have never seen him get bent about some short coming of Amsoil. Every oil and filter on this earth is a comprimise ifnot we would have car's that no one could afford but the rich and oils that where also too expensive for most to afford.

Pure One have always been a good filter but I have always worried about flow number's and how often they get into bypass.
 
I stand on the old research. In fact no filter at all is not as bad as most of you would think. FLow trumpes filtration though on any full flow system. The filtration is great so long as it does not lend to easy bypass mode when cold and as long as it does not comprimise flow.
 
Well, John, while I take your comments well ..and fwt'rw, this is due to the amazing and incredible numbers that were published from a Purolator engineer. They exceed industry standards for hydraulic filters costing much more. The sensibility ..or lack there of, is why would Purolator's OWN industrial division deny themselves these fantastic spec's ..while allowing the automotive division ..at a whopping discount ..trump their ability to filter? Why would they continue to employ the use of inferior medias in a sector where cleanliness is paramount above all else? Why wouldn't they offer either better service life or better levels of filtration in a MUCH cleaner environment than automotive use ..and stay with common spec's?

This has NOTHING to do with EaO vs. PureOne filters ..nor does it detract from the high standard that PureOne has traditionally held in terms of superior filtration. It's simply something that doesn't make rational sense.

The entire industrial machine sector can throw out the traditional 1-12 common thread hydraulic filter as the method of choice ..and switch to a much cheaper 3/4-16 thread method and buy off the shelf PureOne filter.

..or...everyone that sells hydraulic filters can just use rebadged PureOne's and have them come down the line with 1-12 threads.

Do the math on the potential savings that seem to be totally ignored by the rather large community of both machinery and filter producers.
 
Originally Posted By: JohnBrowning

Pure One have always been a good filter but I have always worried about flow number's and how often they get into bypass.


I have some very interesting date directly from Purolator Engineering on the flow vs. PSID performance of the PureONE. I just got his data yesterday and plan on starting a thread that will ease everyone's concerns about the flow performance of the PureONE.
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
... this is due to the amazing and incredible numbers that were published from a Purolator engineer. They exceed industry standards for hydraulic filters costing much more.


So please post up the comparative beta ratio data for these hydraulic filters that you are comparing to the PureONE, and claim to be worse off then the PureONE beta ratio numbers.
 
p164056-432-140.jpg


A - OD (Inches): 3.82
B - Thread Size (Inches): 1 3/8-12
C - Length (Inches): 9.44
D - Gasket OD (Inches): 2.76
E - Gasket ID (Inches): 2.48
Product Type Description: HYDRAULIC SPIN-ON, DURAMAX
Primary Application: Donaldson HMK04 ASSEMBLY
Media Type: Synthetic
Efficiency Beta 2 (Micron): 5
Efficiency Beta 20 (Micron): 10
Efficiency Beta 75 (Micron): 13
Application Note: SYNTEQ Media #6, Viton Version
Product Group: FH

p165877-001-140.jpg


A - OD (Inches): 5.08
B - Thread Size (Inches): 1 1/2-16
C - Length (Inches): 6.66
D - Gasket OD (Inches): 5.05
E - Gasket ID (Inches): 4.71
Product Type Description: HYDRAULIC SPIN-ON
Primary Application: PALL HC7500SUT4H, ZINGA
Primary Application 2: SE-25, DCI HBK05 ASSY
Media Type: Synthetic
Efficiency Beta 2 (Micron): 10
Efficiency Beta 20 (Micron): 17
Efficiency Beta 75 (Micron): 22
Efficiency Beta 1000 (Micron): 23
Application Note: SYNTEQ Media #9
Product Group: FH

p171276-432-140.jpg


A - OD (Inches): 4.77
B - Thread Size (Inches): 1 3/4-12
C - Length (Inches): 11.63
D - Gasket OD (Inches): 3.387
E - Gasket ID (Inches): 3.109
Product Type Description: HYDRAULIC SPIN-ON, DURAMAX
Primary Application: Donaldson HMK05/HMK25 HYD ASSY
Media Type: Synthetic
Efficiency Beta 2 (Micron): 10
Efficiency Beta 20 (Micron): 17
Efficiency Beta 75 (Micron): 22
Application Note: SYNTEQ Media #7 Viton Version
Product Group: FH

Wix

A - OD (Inches): 4.77
B - Thread Size (Inches): 1 3/4-12
C - Length (Inches): 11.63
D - Gasket OD (Inches): 3.387
E - Gasket ID (Inches): 3.109
Product Type Description: HYDRAULIC SPIN-ON, DURAMAX
Primary Application: Donaldson HMK05/HMK25 HYD ASSY
Media Type: Synthetic
Efficiency Beta 2 (Micron): 10
Efficiency Beta 20 (Micron): 17
Efficiency Beta 75 (Micron): 22
Application Note: SYNTEQ Media #7 Viton Version
Product Group: FH

Part Number: 51197XE
UPC Number: 765809521971
Principal Application: Various Caterpillar Applications; John Deere Cotton Pickers. (High Efficiency Version of 51197)
All Applications
Style: Cartridge Lube Metal Canister Filter
Service: Hyd/Transmission
Type: Full Flow
Media: Glass
Height: 8.980
Outer Diameter: 5.094
Inner Diameter: 3.375
Nominal Micron Rating: 7

Gasket Diameters
Number O.D. I.D. Thk.
15114 8 9.025 8.475 0.275
15402 8 6.252 5.852 0.200

Part Number: 51551
UPC Number: 765809515512
Principal Application: Various Hydraulic Applications (10 Micron) - for 20 micron version, use 51552 - for 33 micron, use 51553
All Applications
Style: Spin-On Hydraulic Filter
Service: Hydraulic
Type: Full Flow
Media: Paper
Height: 5.209
Outer Diameter Top: 3.663
Outer Diameter Bottom: Closed
Thread Size: 1-12
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI: None
Beta Ratio: 2/20=5/13
Burst Pressure-PSI: 380
Max Flow Rate: 12-16 GPM
Nominal Micron Rating: 10

Gasket Diameters
Number O.D. I.D. Thk.
Attached 2.729 2.415 0.255

Part Number: 51586
UPC Number: 765809515864
Principal Application: John Deere, Toro
All Applications
Style: Spin-On Hydraulic Filter
Service: Hydraulic
Type: Full Flow
Media: Paper
Height: 4.470
Outer Diameter Top: 3.820
Outer Diameter Bottom: Closed
Thread Size: 1 3/8-12
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI: None
Beta Ratio: 2/20/75=10/21/25
Burst Pressure-PSI: 1000
Max Flow Rate: 24-28 GPM.
Nominal Micron Rating: 17

Gasket Diameters
Number O.D. I.D. Thk.
Attached 2.700 2.500 0.100

Part Number: 51621
UPC Number: 765809516212
Principal Application: Caterpillar Excavators
All Applications
Style: Spin-On Hydraulic Filter
Service: Hydraulic
Type: Full Flow
Media: Paper
Height: 6.991
Outer Diameter Top: 3.689
Outer Diameter Bottom: Closed
Thread Size: 1 1/8-16
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI: None
Burst Pressure-PSI: 304
Max Flow Rate: 18-20 GPM
Nominal Micron Rating: 19

Gasket Diameters
Number O.D. I.D. Thk.
Attached 2.834 2.462 0.275

Part Number: 51631
UPC Number: 765809516311
Principal Application: Sullair Compressors
All Applications
Style: Spin-On Hydraulic Filter
Service: Hydraulic
Type: Full Flow
Media: Glass
Height: 5.477
Outer Diameter Top: 3.698
Outer Diameter Bottom: Closed
Thread Size: .974-20
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI: None
Beta Ratio: 2/20=9/17
Burst Pressure-PSI: 455
Max Flow Rate: 12-16 GPM
Nominal Micron Rating: 11

Gasket Diameters
Number O.D. I.D. Thk.
Attached 2.834 2.462 0.255


Look at the size of this thing. Now factor how many PureOne's you could fit into it. It should only take 3 or 4 to handle the volume.


8285_1.gif


Part Number: 51849
UPC Number: 765809518490
Principal Application: Hydraulic Element For Pall #HC7500SUN8H
All Applications
Style: Spin-On Hydraulic Filter
Service: Hydraulic
Type: Full Flow
Media: Glass
Height: 11.257
Outer Diameter Top: 5.007
Outer Diameter Bottom: Closed
Thread Size: 1 1/2-16
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI: None
Beta Ratio: 2/20=2/9
Burst Pressure-PSI: 340
Max Flow Rate: 28-30 GPM
Nominal Micron Rating: 10

Gasket Diameters
Number O.D. I.D. Thk.
Packed 4.762 4.484 0.139
Packed 5.140 4.750 0.185
 
Originally Posted By: Onmo'Eegusee
Yeah, but look at the flow those are rated for. 28-30 GPM for that last one!


Quote:
Look at the size of this thing. Now factor how many PureOne's you could fit into it. It should only take 3 or 4 to handle the volume.
 
Here's you basic FL1A sized hydraulic filter.

B - Thread Size (Inches): 1 - 12
C - Length (Inches): 5.35
D - Gasket OD (Inches): 2.81
E - Gasket ID (Inches): 2.42
Product Type Description: HYDRAULIC SPIN-ON
Primary Application: GRESEN, CROSS, DONALDSON
Media Type: Cellulose
Efficiency Beta 2 (Micron): 10
Efficiency Beta 20 (Micron): 21
Efficiency Beta 75 (Micron): 25
Substitution: 25 micron version P551553
Product Group: FH

B - Thread Size (Inches): 1 - 12
C - Length (Inches): 5.35
D - Gasket OD (Inches): 2.81
E - Gasket ID (Inches): 2.42
Product Type Description: HYDRAULIC SPIN-ON
Primary Application: GRESEN,CROSS,DONALDSON
Media Type: Cellulose
Efficiency Beta 2 (Micron): 25
Efficiency Beta 20 (Micron): 35
Substitution: 10 micron version P551551
Product Group: FH

Here's the same part numbers in WIX ..note the flow rate

Part Number: 51196
UPC Number: 765809511965
Principal Application: Ford Tractors, Fordson Diesels
All Applications
Style: Spin-On Hydraulic Filter
Service: Hydraulic
Type: Full Flow
Media: Paper
Height: 5.209
Outer Diameter Top: 3.663
Outer Diameter Bottom: Closed
Thread Size: 1-12
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI: None
Beta Ratio: 2/20=36/54
Burst Pressure-PSI: 315
Max Flow Rate: 6-7 GPM
Nominal Micron Rating: 35

Gasket Diameters
Number O.D. I.D. Thk.
Attached 2.729 2.415 0.255

Part Number: 51551
UPC Number: 765809515512
Principal Application: Various Hydraulic Applications (10 Micron) - for 20 micron version, use 51552 - for 33 micron, use 51553
All Applications
Style: Spin-On Hydraulic Filter
Service: Hydraulic
Type: Full Flow
Media: Paper
Height: 5.209
Outer Diameter Top: 3.663
Outer Diameter Bottom: Closed
Thread Size: 1-12
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI: None
Beta Ratio: 2/20=5/13
Burst Pressure-PSI: 380
Max Flow Rate: 12-16 GPM
Nominal Micron Rating: 10

Gasket Diameters
Number O.D. I.D. Thk.
Attached 2.729 2.415 0.255
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Here's you basic FL1A sized hydraulic filter.

Media Type: Cellulose
Efficiency Beta 2 (Micron): 10
Efficiency Beta 20 (Micron): 21
Efficiency Beta 75 (Micron): 25

Media Type: Cellulose
Efficiency Beta 2 (Micron): 25
Efficiency Beta 20 (Micron): 35

Here's the same part numbers in WIX ..note the flow rate

Media: Paper
Beta Ratio: 2/20=36/54
Max Flow Rate: 6-7 GPM
Nominal Micron Rating: 35
Principal Application: Various Hydraulic Applications (10 Micron) - for 20 micron version, use 51552 - for 33 micron, use 51553

All Applications
Beta Ratio: 2/20=5/13
Burst Pressure-PSI: 380
Max Flow Rate: 12-16 GPM
Nominal Micron Rating: 10


From what I'm getting from the data above is that hydraulic filters don't really need to be super filters ... otherwise the manufactures would obviously make them to filter better than they do.

Making a filter that is 95% efficient (Beta=20) at 20~35 microns is pretty easy to achieve, and there are MANY automotive spin-on filters that can do that (even a cheapo FRAM) ... so why don't they do it for a hydraulic system application? There has to be a reason.
 
Yet the cost difference is quite substantial ..and the size is somewhat generic. While Purolator can do much better in a more compact format ..and do it at a discount. To get to the alleged level of PureOne, you have to step up to PALL or the Donaldson Duramax level.

That is, by the mere changing of a thread, the entire standard hydraulic offerings across all filter mans (in the common hydraulic filter) could be upgraded at a discount ..just by rebadging and re-threading a PureOne. You don't even have to offer it in all the threads and sizes ..just your average 3.6xx X 5.xx can with the standard end plate ..and standard 2.8x x 2.4 x gasket.

If that was any more "Prete-porte" (ready to wear) it would be laughable.


..but again, some will attempt to justify why not ..instead of seeing it as something "unright".

It clearly depends on what you "want" as an outcome.

Now I really want it to be true too, but ..it's just not likely ..at least without some major qualification.
 
Maybe the sales volume of hydraulic filters is much less than automotive and internal combustion engine type oil filters. So, a higher price is required per hydraulic filter to recover the design and manufacturing costs. Plus, I doubt a hydraulic filter is changed out as ofter an an automotive filter. There's probably a huge sales volume difference going on. Economics and sales are involved behind the scenes to some extent.

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Now I really want it to be true too, but ..it's just not likely ..at least without some major qualification.


You want what to be true? If it's the advertised PureONE beta ratios, I'm voting that they are true. Just because they are better than a hydraulic filter that is generally 95% at 20 microns doesn't mean an automotive filter can't be better for less money. There are many automotive oil filters that are 95% at 20 microns or even better for pretty cheap.
 
Quote:
Maybe the sales volume of hydraulic filters is much less than automotive and internal combustion engine type oil filters. So, a higher price is required per hydraulic filter to recover the design and manufacturing costs.


What R&D costs? A simple changing of the base plate ..and viola~ ..or rather ..reverse it and wonder why hydraulic filters aren't spec'd for automotive use. The cost of manufacturing should be no more than any other filter (in the aforementioned 3.6x x 5.8x can) ..heck, they don't even have to include a bypass (and in many) or ADBV. A cheaper filter construction can't be asked for.

The change out rate for all the hydraulic filters (same common size) is 250 hours after the initial 50 hours. That's with absolutely no combustion byproducts. Even at Ford's 33mile per gallon/per hour rate, that works out to around 8000 miles with zero warm up events.


What do I want? ..and explanation...
 
But again ... how many hydraulic filters are sold per year vs. automotive filters? I'm betting there is a huge sales volume difference - therefor the companies that choose to produce hydraulic filters have the same costs to manufacture with less sales volume to obtain profits and stay in business.

Maybe Purolator should get into the hydraulic filter manufacturing business. Or maybe you should start your own hydraulic filter factory! ... and sell them for $5 each. You could make a killing !!
wink.gif
 
Yes, agreed, but automotive filters comprise many various sized cans and threads ..some with and some without bypass valves ..some with or without ADBV's ....while nearly 100% fitment (in the 1-12 tread) could be filled with ONE FILTER ..and THAT filter being the same size as ONE filter that covered ONE or TWO manufacturers for DECADES.

Maybe industrial customers ..with $100k+ machinery on the line just don't need better anything.
21.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

Maybe industrial customers ..with $100k+ machinery on the line just don't need better anything.
21.gif



Do hydraulic filters really need to filter with that high of an efficiency? What's the internal system contamination generator besides internal system wear and maybe dirt intrusion from exterior seal leakage, etc?

Seems like the majority of the hydraulic filters have average automotive type of beta ratios. If hydraulic filters needed to have high beta ratios, why don't the manufactures just use better media like some of the automotive filter makers use? There has to be a reason hydraulic filters are made and priced like they are.
 
That's the thing. In that environment there are no size restraints ..the filters I specifically mentioned are on the large size for automotive filters in a contemporary sense. If such media was available ..it would translate out to either smaller filters ..or longer service intervals. That is, a 250 hour change out rate would be 400 hours in the same can.

Either that our the filtration rate that Purolator currently publishes can't be spec'd with an "open end" longevity component.

That is, even if these spec's are REAL ..they have to have some qualification to them. Like ..after a limited number of hours of usage they don't apply anymore.

I'm probably not stating this clearly. There are immutable angles to this that cannot be trumped.


Part Number: 51515
UPC Number: 765809515154
Principal Application: Chrysler Family of Cars/Trucks (57-70), Ford Family of Cars/Trucks (57-00), Mazda Trucks (94-00), Toyota Landcruiser (71-96) - (Two Quart version is 51773)
All Applications
Style: Spin-On Lube Filter
Service: Lube
Type: Full Flow
Media: Paper/Glass
Height: 5.178
Outer Diameter: 3.660
Thread Size: 3/4-16
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI: 8-11
Anti-Drain Back Valve: Yes
Ends: Metal
Beta Ratio: 2/20=13/23
Burst Pressure-PSI: 290
Max Flow Rate: 7-9 GPM
Nominal Micron Rating: 21

Part Number: 51551
UPC Number: 765809515512
Principal Application: Various Hydraulic Applications (10 Micron) - for 20 micron version, use 51552 - for 33 micron, use 51553
All Applications
Style: Spin-On Hydraulic Filter
Service: Hydraulic
Type: Full Flow
Media: Paper
Height: 5.209
Outer Diameter Top: 3.663
Outer Diameter Bottom: Closed
Thread Size: 1-12
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI: None
Beta Ratio: 2/20=5/13
Burst Pressure-PSI: 380
Max Flow Rate: 12-16 GPM
Nominal Micron Rating: 10


They spec a looser media for automotive use ..or rather a finer media for hydraulic use in the (near enough) same can.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

H
Beta Ratio and how and why to use it instead of efficiency rating
Replies
8
Views
2K
ZeeOSix
P
  • Locked
articles on beta ratio and efficiency
Replies
1
Views
5K
ZeeOSix
dnewton3
  • Locked
micron effeciency (rating) versus insolubles
Replies
4
Views
2K
daman
Back
Top